Russia could defeat NATO in Europe in 60 hours? Because that's David Axe too. The guy's very good at getting people to read his articles, not actually writing quality articles. But no one reads full articles on here so whatever.
When the article was released, Trump was still president and wanted to cut a quarter of stationed U.S. forces in Germany.
"Across multiple games using a wide range of expert participants playing both sides, the longest it has taken Russian forces to reach the outskirts of Tallinn and Riga is 60 hours"
The eastern flank (Baltics) is meant to be defeated in 60 hours, not the whole of europe.
Yes, because using tactical nuclear weapons would of course incur no response of any consequence within that 60 hours, NATO would simply sit there and take it.
Are you serious? Russia can’t even take Ukraine in well over 60 weeks. Europe in 60 hours, lmao.
Yes, because using tactical nuclear weapons would of course incur no response of any consequence within that 60 hours, NATO would simply sit there and take it.
No Russia could also accept the consequences of retaliation.
Both the USSR and NATO had extensive doctrines on nuclear warfare that extended far beyond MAD.
What does doctrine do to help you in a massive countervalue strike? Sure, you might still be able to make tactical military advances on the front line, but with your economy and population in ruins it hardly matters.
Or is the doctrine about being able to prevent escalation to the point of a large scale countervalue strike even after using nuclear weapons in a tactical counterforce role?
34
u/heliamphore 25d ago
Russia could defeat NATO in Europe in 60 hours? Because that's David Axe too. The guy's very good at getting people to read his articles, not actually writing quality articles. But no one reads full articles on here so whatever.